Skip to main content
Log in

Skin-sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction: The M. D. Anderson cancer center experience

  • Educational Review
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: Skin-sparing mastectomy with immediate reconstruction has become popular with patients because, compared with delayed reconstruction, it improves the cosmetic result, reduces cost and anesthetic risk, and in one stage completes most of the surgical treatment that the patient will ever require for treatment of her breast cancer. In the past, reconstruction was often delayed because of an unwarranted fear of locoregional recurrence or because the patient, having to live for some time with a flat chest wall, would be more appreciative of her reconstruction. This concept is now considered unacceptable, and many women regard this attitude as evidence of a lack of concern for the psychological impact of mastectomy.

Method: Provided that the breast skin is not involved with or close to the tumor, we prefer to perform the mastectomy with removal of only the nipple-areolar complex and the tumor biopsy scar. The mastectomy is otherwise the same as a standard modified radical mastectomy with removal of all breast tissue and a level I–II axillary node dissection. Our preference is to use the transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap with a microvascular anastomosis because it provides a better blood supply, reduces abdominal wall muscle sacrifice, and eliminates the bulge from tunneling required by a pedicled flap.

Result: Using the skin-sparing technique with immediate reconstruction in 545 patients with early-stage breast cancer, our overall incidence of regional recurrence was 2.6%. Of 95 patients who were followed for >four years, the recurrence rate was 4.2%.

Conclusions: Regional recurrence after skin-sparing mastectomy is a function of the biology of the tumor and the stage of the disease and is not affected by the use of immediate reconstruction or skin-preservation mastectomy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Buzdar AU, McNeese MD, Hortobagyi GN, et al. Is chemotherapy effective in reducing the local failure rate in patients with operable breast cancer?Cancer 1990;65:394–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kroll SS, Ames F, Singletary SE, Schusterman MA. The oncologic risks of skin preservation at mastectomy when combined with immediate reconstruction of the breast.Surg Gynecol Obstet 1991;172:17–20.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Balch CM, Singletary SE, Bland KI. Clinical decision-making in early breast cancer.Ann Surg 1993;217:207–25.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. United States Department of Health and Human Services News Release P92-11. Washington, DC: U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 1992:1–4.

  5. Fisher JC. The silicone controversy—when will science prevail?N Engl J Med 1992;326:1696–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hartrampf CR Jr, Scheflan M, Black PW. Breast reconstruction with a transverse abdominal island flap.Plast Reconstr Surg 1982;69:216–24.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kroll SS, Netscher DT. Complications of TRAM flap breast reconstruction in obese patients.Plast Reconstr Surg 1989;84:886–92.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Schusterman MA, Kroll SS, Weldon ME. Immediate breast reconstruction: why the free TRAM over the conventional TRAM flap?Plast Reconstr Surg 1992;90:255–61.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Schusterman MA, Kroll SS, Miller MJ, et al. The free TRAM flap for breast reconstruction: one center's experience with 211 consecutive cases.Ann Plast Surg 1994;32:234–41.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Elliott LF, Beegle PH, Hartrampf CR Jr. The lateral transverse thigh flap, an alternative for autogenous-tissue breast reconstruction.Plast Reconstr Surg 1990;85:169–78.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hartrampf CR Jr, Noel RT, Drazan L, Elliott LFF, Bennett GK, Beegle PH. Rubens's fat pad for breast reconstruction: a peri-iliac soft-tissue free flap.Plast Reconstr Surg 1994;93:402–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Krohn IT, Cooper DR, Bassett JG. Radical mastectomy: thick vs. thin skin flaps.Arch Surg 1982;117:760–3.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Slavin SA, Love SM, Goldwyn RM. Recurrent breast cancer following immediate reconstruction with myocutaneous flaps.Plast Reconstr Surg 1994;93:1191–204.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Holmes FA, Singletary SE, Kroll S, et al. Fat necrosis in an autogenously reconstructed breast mimicking recurrent carcinoma at mammography.Breast Dis 1988;1:211–8.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lee CH, Poplack SP, Stahl RS. Mammographic appearance of the transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flap.Breast Dis 1994;7:99–107.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Singletary SE, McNeese MD, Hortobagyi GN. Feasibility of breast conservation surgery after induction chemotherapy for locally advanced breast carcinoma.Cancer 1992;69:2849–52.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hunt K, Baldwin B, Singletary SE, Ames F, Strom E, McNeese M. Postoperative radiotherapy does not interfere with TRAM flap viability or cosmetic results in patients with high risk breast cancer. In:Proceedings of the 48th Annual Cancer Symposium of the Society of Surgical Oncology. Abstract P30, 1995:43.

  18. Halpern J, McNeese MD, Kroll SS. Irradiation of prosthetically augmented breasts: a retrospective study on toxicity and cosmetic results.Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1990;18:189–91.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Evans GRD, Schusterman MA, Kroll SS, et al. Reconstruction and the radiated breast: is there a role for implants? In:Proceedings of the 48th Annual Cancer Symposium of the Society of Surgical Oncology. Abstract 106, 1995:62.

  20. Kroll SS, Hamilton S. Nipple reconstruction with the double-opposing-tab flap.Plast Reconstr Surg 1989;84:520–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Becker H. The use of intradermal tattoo to enhance the final result of nipple-areola reconstruction.Plast Reconstr Surg 1986;77:673–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Little JW, Spear SL. The finishing touches in nipple-areolar reconstruction.Perspect Plast Surg 1988;2:1–17.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Singletary, S.E. Skin-sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction: The M. D. Anderson cancer center experience. Annals of Surgical Oncology 3, 411–416 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02305673

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02305673

Key Words

Navigation